Yes, but the point was that the Dailies were the centerpiece of the main page. Now they're gone, and there's just one article, which doesn't give the feeling of a continuous daily series. Rather, it's like "featured article of the week" or something.

Not only that, but half the time (or maybe even more than that) they're not even original articles, but rather simply excerpts from classic books. I'd be interested to hear any reasoning for the decline myself.

I've been noticing the decline in daillies since around early 2011, even before Jeff Tucker left (so I don't think it has as much to do with that as some people suppose). Perhaps it's a sign of the diminishing intellectual quality overall of the "Austrolibertarian movement." At the same time while we all whine about the lack of daily articles it's not exactly like we're writing any ourselves.

I think they need to move away from fluff/rehashing old articles and go back to showcasing new work by Austrian authors and scholars. For readability, 1 - 2 articles a day is fine, and they can always do one "classic" with one newer piece of work.

Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...

It would be nice, and maybe some of the VR contributors would be interested in doing that. I think some have actually submitted work in the past to the Mises Daily without hearing even an acknowledgement of receipt. I used to check the Mises Daily before checking the forum. Now I check the Daily about once a week, and the main reason I come here is the forum.

The other sites I tend to read are The Daily capitalist, which has some very good technical articles written from an Austrian perspective; the EPJ, which can be a bit bombastic at times; and ZH, for some of the crazy stuff they dig up. All sporadically. I might give VR a go in addition to mises.org. So little time though!

Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...

Next it's "C"ommunity, then "B"log, and finally "A"bout. Then one day you go to the site and it's gone.

I had always been impressed by the fact that there are a surprising number of individuals who never use their minds if they can avoid it, and an equal number who do use their minds, but in an amazingly stupid way. - Carl Jung, Man and His Symbols

At the same time while we all whine about the lack of daily articles it's not exactly like we're writing any ourselves.

Why don't you guys send a few of those to get republished as Mises daillies? if they're as desperate for new content as they should be, they should be happy to take them?

I've sent them three of my articles and I have not heard back. It's been weeks. At the very least they could have said "you suck." Alternatively, "we'll get back to you in 2 months." I have received neither response. Sigh.

I think some have actually submitted work in the past to the Mises Daily without hearing even an acknowledgement of receipt.

I've sent them three of my articles and I have not heard back. It's been weeks. At the very least they could have said "you suck." Alternatively, "we'll get back to you in 2 months." I have received neither response. Sigh.

Very interesting... I wonder what is going on. Incidentally, I sent Danny Sanchez and Peter Klein not a daily article but a my master's dissertation on Bohm Bawerk's price theory (and its interesting complementarity with much of agent based and experimental work) a while ago and haven't heard anything at all...

Where is Danny these days? I understand he must be quite busy, he's on my fb, do you think I should get in touch with him that way to convey out collective woes regarding recent developments here? (I hope this doesn't get me dissociated...)

At this point it may be futile. A lot of us are already on our way contributing to our own sites. Mises.org is now just an archive of what's been. I don't see much reason to put any effort into making it alive again (especially when those who actually run it apparently have lost interest in maintaining it at a quality level).

I had always been impressed by the fact that there are a surprising number of individuals who never use their minds if they can avoid it, and an equal number who do use their minds, but in an amazingly stupid way. - Carl Jung, Man and His Symbols

I wouldn't despair so much. Hopefully whatever the issue is will be remedied. I think the institute has suffered without Rockwell and Tucker guiding it, though. Tucker poured a huge amount of energy into it.

Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...

At the same time while we all whine about the lack of daily articles it's not exactly like we're writing any ourselves.

There's a difference between writing the articles and them getting published as Mises Dailies.

abskebabs:

if they're as desperate for new content as they should be, they should be happy to take them?

You'd think that, but from what I hear, it's like pulling teeth just to get a response. I've communicated with multiple people who sent in content and had to make multiple inquiries before even hearing back. And even then, the concensus seems to be that there isn't much interest in supporting such efforts.

Wheylous:

If you have him on your Facebook, I would only recommend pointing out that you've sent in your thesis. I wouldn't bother with the other details, because that might tick him off.

+1

Bert:

I don't see much reason to put any effort into making it alive again (especially when those who actually run it apparently have lost interest in maintaining it at a quality level).

...and yet I've never seen more of a push for donations than over this past year.

...and yet I've never seen more of a push for donations than over this past year.

I am guessing that it is to pay for the new CTO.

Also, I wonder if this means that Daivs Veksler is no longer going to do work for the institute. I know that he has a full-time job in China; so, I am guessing that the institute wants someone who is on location and full time.

P.S. I say this as a complete outsider.

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

I feel like I'm the only one who defaults to worst case scenario (read: always conspiracy) absent evidence to the contrary. Isn't it just easier to assume that Mises.org has (or had) unmatched influence in the realm of alternative economics and pushing that trend toward anarchism, and that therefore establishment interests have simply coopted the institute?

It's like...I don't know, I don't like to use this as my main argument in all cases, but I've been on the internet long enough to know that sites of major influence don't just fall off without a fight. With the forums crumbling and obviously ignored, and the move toward an abominably horrific site navigation interface (which originally included a newer, utterly useless "community"), and now the blatent decay of content generally... This doesn't happen by accident with an organization as legendary and established as the damned mises isntitute itself.

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.
—Mark Twain

I think that, maybe due to the recession, funding has been short. A year or two ago, even before J. Tucker left for LFB, they were cutting staff. There used to be more editors available for Mises Dailies, although I don't know how staffing has changed since then. But, Daniel Sanchez is responsible for a large swath of work on the website (including the academy), so I'm not surprised that there's less time to read over Dailies submissions. I also think they narrowed the scope for acceptable writings; for example, they rejected my last two submissions, but this was around a year ago (my review of Engineering the Financial Crisis and an article, "Austrian Economics and its Place" — admittedly, they pointed out a number of errors in that last piece [which I corrected, for the most part]).

I think that current administators are doing a great job, it's just that they're a little thinned. I could, of course, be completely wrong.

At the same time while we all whine about the lack of daily articles it's not exactly like we're writing any ourselves.

Why don't you guys send a few of those to get republished as Mises daillies? if they're as desperate for new content as they should be, they should be happy to take them?

I've sent them three of my articles and I have not heard back. It's been weeks. At the very least they could have said "you suck." Alternatively, "we'll get back to you in 2 months." I have received neither response. Sigh.

All the more reason to get LibertyHQ up and running!

You could submit stuff for the Austrian Economics Research Conference 2013:

"Proposals for individual papers, complete paper sessions or symposia, and interactive workshops are encouraged. Papers should be well developed, but at a stage where they can still benefit from the group's discussion. Preference will be given to recent papers that have not been presented at major conferences. All topics related to Austrian economics, broadly conceived, and related social-science disciplines and business disciplines such as management, strategy, and entrepreneurship are appropriate for the conference. Proposals from junior faculty and PhD students are especially encouraged."

To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process.
Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!"
Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."

Daniel, I don't think that my stuff is academic enough for those settings :D

Furthermore, it's more of a rehash of already-existing ideas that have not been ironed out quite completely.

Jonathan - I understand that quality is a big concern for them, but it seems like most of their recent stuff has been just David Gordon reviewing things. Don't get me wrong, that's useful stuff, but it's not intensive capital theory or something.

The VR has a lot of solid papers that have been peer-reviewed and that aren't too complex to accidentally have let a problem slip by unnoticed.